ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
A Review of Fault Diagnosis and Intelligent Operations and Maintenance for Agricultural Machinery: Fault Mechanisms, Key Technologies, and Practical Recommendations.
Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Agricultural machinery operates under variable loads, impacts, dust, and changing soil-crop interactions, allowing faults to propagate through energy, material, information, and control pathways. This qualitative review synthesizes 195 research publications across fault formation, trustworthy diagnosis, prognostics and proactive risk control, maintenance and recovery, and case-based evidence assessment. Empirical findings are reported separately from review-derived recommendations, the authors' conceptual requirements, and mandatory provisions of applicable standards or law. The literature most consistently supports controlled-fault identification, selected single-machine field monitoring, and localized operational compensation. Evidence is weaker for transfer across machines and seasons, calibrated prognostics, safety authorization, post-repair verification, and fleet-scale deployment. On this basis, the review recommends mission profile-specific fault boundaries, traceable diagnostic outputs, explicit uncertainty and abstention, and risk decisions linked to remaining work and resources. It also proposes a diagnostic passport, risk evolution trajectory, repair-effectiveness label, case-evidence matrix, and closed-loop repair workflow as review-level organizing constructs. No included study continuously followed the same machine or fleet through diagnosis, prognosis, authorization, maintenance, acceptance, and feedback; the framework therefore connects evidence-supported stages theoretically rather than claiming end-to-end validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.